[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: force-confnew (was: Document correct buildd chroot setup somewhere?)

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 02:47:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> And I think it's a good thing that not all buildds use lvm chroots
> so that we actually find problems we might not see otherwise, or
> maybe much later.

Sadly, I have to differ on this one.  I'd rather appreciate a coherent,
identical setup everywhere where it's possible.  Either fail everywhere
due to that issue or nowhere.  Having setup differences that boil down
to "this buildd of that arch behaves differently than the others" or
"I guess this is arch-specific because it only happens there" (while
it's just due to the setup), does not help IMO.

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't fail on obvious bugs in a package.
I'm just not sure if we should allow bystanding packages that happen
to be pulled in somewhere (and not being uninstalled/purged) to screw up
the build process *in a non-deterministic way*.

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
 .''`.  Philipp Kern                        Debian Developer
: :' :  http://philkern.de                         Stable Release Manager
`. `'   xmpp:phil@0x539.de                         Wanna-Build Admin
  `-    finger pkern/key@db.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: